Interesting stuff Kirt… and some good choices for examples! The first Mullins piece works very well with the prominent zigzag. And some of those Frazetta’s are great layouts!
And i’d agree that you can use all sorts of shapes and lines to draw the attention of the viewer and lead the eye. And those sahpes and lines can be formed by the people (or creatures), objects or light and shadow.
Thanks!! 
I get it… Very good explanation. You’ll notice I’ve only used some backgrounds in some of my stuff if you stumble onto them. Couldn’t figure out why it didn’t work, unless using stageplay rules.
duddlebug - Absolutely, you can use colors, curves or forms to create these diagonals as well. But, don’t limit yourself to just this idea when trying to control the composition of your images. There are many other ways to do the same thing.
For example: In Mullens’ second image here you’ll notice the rule of thirds and a strong vertical line that also points the viewer’s attention towards the character.
In Frazetta’s bottom image, you’ll find a lot of directed curves that serve the same purpose as a diagonal (I’ll overpaint this later today … it’s a fantastic example as well).
jmBoekestein - Well, I’m looking around for some of your work and all I’m finding are unfinished character illustrations. So, I can’t say that I’ve seen any of your backgrounds to draw an opinion on. :shrug:
If you have a link to a finished piece, then I’ll gladly take a look at it and offer any advice on how diagonals could improve your image (if applicable … the idea doesn’t work for every image).
the use of diagonals is a way of controlling the dynamics of a painting.
as Kirt pointed out, it is nice to have them, But sometimes you don’t.
As long as you know how they are going to effect the viewer then they are very powerful.
If they don’t support the intent then they are distracting.
Thanks, Kirt! I often see diagonals best with a little help from “marguerita”. 
Just kidding, I actually don’t drink 
~Rebeccak
heh heh… :rolleyes: … precisely my point, I couldn’t find the background with my minds eye.
I only have dsg sketches…:)…I’ll link them, maybe you find something in there.
here’s a few I figure could be useful.
That’s about it for drawings and paintings with background elements for dynamics or something similar (well, for what I dare show anyway).
Well, you can pick any, I’m sure there will be a lot to talk about if you can find the time.
Thanks for posting this, Kirt. An excellent “brief look”! Mullins certainly knows what he’s doing… breathtaking doodles. But I kinda like your cyan lines too
OK … a few responses since I last checked.
Let me start by putting up those Frazetta images again (like I said I would).
In most of the Frazetta images the use of diagonals is a bit different than the Craig Mullens examples I showed earlier. You’ll notice in the paintover above that perspective diagonals aren’t used much, so I just left them out so we could focus on what is going on in these fantastic action paintings. In all instances Frazetta uses the directional diagonals (WHITE) rather effectively. There is a flow to his paintings that causes the viewer to not linger in one spot for very long. The eye is drawn towards the main point of interest.[ul][li]Top left: The white diagonals direct the viewer to the left side of the image. Strong opposing diagonals break the movement in key areas to allow the viewer to see the intensity of the horse and the throw of the cowboy. I didn’t draw two diagonals in because it just got confusing. However, you could also see how the spine of the cowboy breaks the leftward movement and the cowboy’s right leg breaks the upward movement.[]Top right: This is an interesting image because it’s full of diagonals. I’ve chosen to show some of the more dominant pairs to highlight how Frazetta uses these in areas that he wants the viewer’s attention to focus on. As the eye travels upwards in this image you become aware of the girl, guy and the creature because of these pairings of diagonals.[]Middle left: Another example of pairs working well to direct the viewer to see the individual characters and elements. Notice that the movement is still in an upward direction and also the unique relationship caused by the white diagonal on the top character and the top left opposing diagonal (white on left creature). See what I mean by diagonals being multi-functioning? :D[]I drew these arrows upward but it almost works just as well going down. Again, opposing diagonals in all the right places to have the viewer see the important parts of the image.[]Bottom: This one follows the rules more like Mullens’ images above. The difference is that instead of hard diagonals, Frazetta uses curves to the same effect. Notice how all of the curves point to the left side of the image and stong opposing diagonals are used to point out the girl on horseback and the waves crashing on the rocks.[/ul]
[/li]
Now the good stuff … Thanks for supplying images jmBoekestein, I’ll see if I can’t get to each one to offer a few pointers. But for now, I’ll look at your first image.
[ul][li]Top: Your image here only has a few diagonals and as I see it they really aren’t serving any purpose except to maybe frame the bird (eagle?). Yeah, you can do that … but does it make the image dynamic and interesting to look at? Not really. You’ve just created a frame within a frame.[]Middle: I’ve repainted your clouds a bit to try and add some diagonal theory to it (really quickly too so don’t laugh at my clouds). Hope you don’t mind. :D[]Bottom: And so we end up with a really simple diagonal design here. The clouds now have diagonals applied to them to draw your attention to the eagle. The eagle itself becomes the break point or opposing diagonals.[/ul]
[/li]
More fun with Kirt later … same Bat-channel, same Bat-time.
OK another quick one and that’s all I have time for today …
This second image has a lot of diagonals in it and some of them actually work to draw your attention towards the characters. However, there are just too many opposing diagonals and it’s not quite clear which direction the flow of the image is heading.
By simply raising the character’s arm up & adding a stronger shadow underneath him, I’ve created a much stronger and dominant diagonal that points upwards and to the left. This is what you want your focus on (that the boy is having a bird land on his arm). I’m using the bird as an opposing diagonal and I’ve also added some bushes in the background which are also opposing at the point of interest.
If I were to work on this image more, I’d probably reposition the cat more effectively and maybe change the pose of the boy some more to use his legs to my advantage.
Still, you can see how much this image has improved by just a few minor adjustments and using diagonals more effectively.
good stuff… I think Im getting the idea and it does improve the images just by those minnor changes.
but…
Do you think Mullins or Frazetta think about the diagonals when scketching? Do they work some character poses, and then fit the pose to fit the diagonals? or do they create the pose already thinking on the diagonals? or does it became a sixth sense?
Well, I know you are not in their minds hehe but im serius about the questions. I want to know If they do work the diagonals on their scketches before the paint or it just came natural to them.
thanks for the lesson.
Yeah, that’s a hard question to answer unless I were either Mullens or Frazetta (which I am most certainly not ).
But, I’d wager to say that skilled artists are aware of these rules and it comes to them without much second thought. I think the only time they’d realize that they are actively thinking about such theories (this one or any other) is when an image just doesn’t seem to be working.
In that case, I believe they would consider certain theories and how they might help improve the image that they are working on.
In my own work I tend to just get right into it and work on ideas with sketches and thumbnails. I’ll then review them carefully seeing what is working and what is not. If a certain theory will help the image, I’ll try something in another sketch and try to finalize my ideas.
Still, even after this work is done … I’ll often start on a clean sheet while referencing my WIP stuff.
Every artist attacks problems in their own ways. I sometimes get lucky with a happy incident or fortunate accident. There are millions of techniques, so you shouldn’t limit yourself to just one principle (such as diagonals).
Once you started fixing jmBoekestein’s images, I started to see what you were getting at. Before that, I had the same question Mal de Ojo had. Thanks Kirt.
Composition is one area I need to learn a lot about. I know the rule of thirds from taking a photography class, but beyond that, I’m lost.
Do you have any book suggestions to help us noobs out?
Nerf
Nerfie - Book recommendations for diagonal theories? Hmmm … I’ll have to dig through my collection and see where it’s discussed. I actually learned this stuff from my HS teacher (thank you Mr. Murphy for all your time and wisdom!) and I don’t recall reading about it in a book.
Sorry, I’ll see if I can’t find some more information for you. :hmm:
Kirt, this is an interesting interpretation of the underlying geometry of the painting. Thanks alot
Geometry defines order. It is always very useful to be able to disect things into geometrical entities and relationships. They are good for controlling and evaluating the composition. In 3D design, i.e. architecture, this becomes even more useful, as directionality and intensity become more sensitive to the overall form. What makes it more difficult, is the multidimensional aspects of geometry to adhere to certain functions.
The problem with geometry, is that it lacks the ability to connect subjects to objects under one structure. I think it is simply by definition, an abstract representation!!
Personally, I use different metaphor for that connection, while geometry is part of its constituents. That metaphor is “streams of energy” which could represent intensities, static & dynamic, light and matter, events & people, sensation and perception, as well as complexity and disorder, and most importantly TIME.
Diagonal theorm, includes directionality but no magnitude. It is basically a door step into the world of composition, which could be applied not only to painting, but to theatre, music, architecture, poetry, calligraphy, and most other audio/visio arts. Essentially, it is natural in our perceptions.
Oh, did I say that this was the most valuable lesson so far on this forum, well done Kirt !
Thanks for showing how this can be done!
Only with the bird I had the feeling that it should be in empty space sucking in the attention.
I’ve got a lot to learn…
edit: The more I run over the posiibilities the more I find now. Makes a lot of sense now to use diagonals for compositions. Glad this came up, thanks again. 
great tutorial. it helps when you really think that something doesnt work in your image. although, sometimes the diagonals just come naturally and you dont really do it on purpose. i mean, when youre sketching, you dont always say to yourself, ok, i’ve got one flowing this way, then it’ll come up here so this is what i’ll draw, and then i wanna make them see this, so i’ll just draw this curve here, blahblah. no. i dont think ppl really do that. it just comes naturally. however, if it doesnt work, the ‘flow’ is broken, then i’m pretty sure ppl will go back and check if its their diagonals that are not right. thanks for this.
I was getting the lines right for a portrait and figured I needed more tension. Based on what I know of human perception and the world around I figured that diagonal and weight points of an image could be spread along paraboles (sp?) and/or circualer shapes cross secting eachother.
Since everythnig around us actually moves in a more or less curved fashion, or around some hinge point, it should only be logical for the mind to create curvatures from diagonal ‘tension’ and ‘energies’.
It seems to make nice balanced ‘equations’, heh. I’m trying to work with three or four of them at a time. They stretch through cross sections of diagonals or weight points of the diagonals. I think it works, or I’m indulging myself too much.
Any thoughts on this anyone?
edit: I’ll try and make an example later on. Mght help to see what I mean.
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.